|
آیا پنل جهانی تغییرات اقلیم نهادی سیاسی است؟ خیر! برخی افراد بر این گمانند که گزارش های این نهاد توسط گروه خاصی از دانشمندان در سازمان ملل تهیه می شود از همین رو برخی کشورهای خاص در جهت فریب دادن سایر کشورها هستند. این در حالی است که این نهاد در سال 1988 تشکیل شده است. این نهاد خودش هیچ پژوهشی انجام نمی دهد اما در عوض حاصل هزاران پژوهش داوری شده از سراسر جهان را بررسی می کند و گزارش های ارزیابی تهیه می نماید. در ادامه این مطلب ساختار این نهاد معرفی شده است. این اولین بخش از مجموعه پرسش و پاسخی است که توسط دکتر برت پریس در دانشگاه موناش استرالیا تهیه شده است و مولف تلاش کرده است در طی آن به برخی سوالات در این زمینه پاسخ گوید. مرجع: http://www-personal.buseco.monash.edu.au/~BParris/BPClimateChangeQ&As.html#_Toc240972823
The IPCC is a political body and its reports are scientifically unreliable
False. There are many misconceptions about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Some people appear to believe the IPCC’s reports are concocted by a small band of ‘UN scientists’ in collaboration with (presumably) left-wing governments intent on deceiving the world. Nothing could be further from the truth. The IPCC is a scientific intergovernmental body created in 1988 by the World Meteorological Organization (WMO) and the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP). It is the principal source of scientific advice for the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC).[4]
The IPCC does not conduct its own research or climate monitoring. Instead it undertakes a comprehensive review and distillation of many thousands of published peer-reviewed papers and reports, representing the work of the overwhelming majority of the world’s climate scientists and produces assessment reports publishing these findings. A good summary of the nature of the IPCC’s work was given by Rik Leemans: “a scientific assessment applies the judgment of experts to existing knowledge to provide scientifically credible answers to policy-relevant questions.”[5]
The three working groups of the Fourth Assessment Report, published in 2007, produced reports on The Physical Science Basis, Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability and Mitigation of Climate Change, as well as a Synthesis Report. Drafts of the chapters attracted more than 30,000 comments, which were taken into account in producing the final reports.[6] Each of the reports includes a Summary for Policymakers. Unlike the chapters making up the substance of the reports on which these summaries are based, the summaries are agreed line-by-line by government delegates, which includes all governments who are members of the WMO and UNEP. While tedious and sometimes controversial, this process has had the advantage of ensuring that all member governments sign off on the summaries of the reports, which, as Leemans notes, “has been instrumental in the broad acceptance of IPCC’s conclusions by UNFCCC and policy makers.”[7]
Some have interpreted the government approval of the summaries as proof that the IPCC reports are ‘political’ and therefore unreliable. Usually those making this charge are implying that the IPCC reports are unnecessarily ‘alarmist’ and are being driven by radical left-wing government agendas. A moment’s thought should show that this is nonsense: Sitting around the table approving the Summaries for Policymakers for the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report were: the conservative government of Australia, the world’s largest coal exporter, under John Howard, the United States under the conservative administration of George W. Bush, the governments of Saudi Arabia, the other OPEC states and Russia, all major oil and gas producers, and the government of China, the fastest growing greenhouse gas emitter in the world. If anything the influence of some governments served to make the final summary texts more conservative than the scientists would have preferred. Continue here
|
